Abstract
This study explores the contextual elements impacting employer representatives’ (i.e., line managers, supervisors, and HR Managers) decisions to authorise or decline personalised, non-standard work arrangements, known as idiosyncratic deals or i-deals. Prior research has underexplored how contexts may shape employer representatives’ i-deals processing. Drawing on Gooderham, Mayrhofer and Brewster’s comparative contextual framework, which emphasises institutional awareness and the layered levels of contexts, as well as a process-based comparative case study approach, this study provides empirical evidence of the contingency of context(s) for how i-deals responses are determined. Drawing on evidence from two firms- one a multinational telecommunications firm with operations across Nigeria, the other, a large-sized, locally-owned Nigerian law firm with branches in different states, findings from the study reveal that responses to i-deals negotiations are shaped by context-based considerations associated with the i-deals requested, the i-dealer(s), timing and outcomes considerations, and prior i-deals experiences. Overall, this study demonstrates that a more nuanced understanding of the intersecting, multilevel and time-sensitive factors impacting i-deals negotiation outcomes is pivotal for grasping the broader contextual complexities that firms navigate.